BTC maximalist delusion

You're delusional.

I only care about ETH. I don't think anyone use Bitcoin as their unit of account for anything but historical reason.

Guess what? Legacies come and go. Bitcoin's days are numbered.

Assuming BTC is digital gold how much market dominance does that mean it should have?

BTC maximalists are worst then new bankers. It is not in vain when they say give man a power and it will reveal his true character.

BTC maximalists are exactly like that, they are authoritorian. Hate competiton and tweet 24/7 while jerking of to fcking Andreas biggest btc shill of them all.

Even fucking Richard Heart left it in ditch and yet week before he was like "people are retards. We must not give them a chance to chose because they are literally mentally impaired."

Stalin would be proud!

1% or less.

What are you basing that on?

The Winklevoss jab at neural plasticity in old people can apply just as well to Bitcoin maximalists. You've conditioned yourself for years to that train of thought, and now your brain is literally unable to rewire to a different situation.
It's amazing the coping mechanisms in place. "People don't understand Bitcoin yet, that's why they aren't in".
I heard about Bitcoin at 30 cents, thought it was dumb, looked at it again at $10, thought it was dumb, looked at it again at $100... Did I make the same mistake as you in being unable to change my frame of thought, certainly. But at the same time, Bitcoin's value proposition didn't change one iota.
When I read one article about Ethereum last March, I immediately saw the value proposition. A decentralized currency to buy drugs and dodge taxes had no appeal, but a decentralized network for trustless applications and a censorship resistant internet sounded incredible right off the bat.
Delving into the whole crypto ecosystem, I came to realise Bitcoin could have been that as well - if Blockstream didn't stall development on purpose and censor stuff through community manipulation in complete antithesis of Bitcoin's original ethos.
Bitcoin was an important step, but Ethereum is superior in all the ways that matter. In time perhaps Ethereum will be just a step as well. There's certainly no improvement in the current batch of contenders (Cardano, Eos, Neo) nor in would-be radical innovators (Iota, Hashgraph, R3) due to fundamental flaws or limited use cases; but in a few years, perhaps a better cryptocurrency will come.
Either way, clinging to the past is riskier every day. Any rational investor uses ETH as the unit of reference at this point, with the knowledge this mental framework must be reevaluated on a yearly basis.

On the fact that its just another shitcoin like rest of them. Complete shit. And no Im not Roger shill, that shit is even bigger pos.

>but in a few years, perhaps a better cryptocurrency will come.

Quantum (QTUM) is already here.

My fedora did a backflip.

1,000% this

I agree with you but I have no idea how Bitcoin will perform mid term.

If their was a new crypto called asscoin, that was exactly like btc, it wouldn't even get past the ICO.

Even BTC maximalists know that. What does that have to do with anything?

indisputable truth. Imagine the ICO;
We're going to make a chain that is designed to be slow and have high fees.
But that's ok because it will have a second layer with fast transactions and low fees.
And this second layer won't be decentralised, so we can capture all the value in the chain at the second layer, whilst most people don't notice and think it's actually a distributed cryptocurrency with a real blockchain.
Who would invest in that shit? Aside from the traditional finance industry because they're scared of being massacred by genuine crypto.
Answer; absolutely nobody with any brain at all. Bitcoin Core only got where it is because it pulled a bait and switch, and it was only able to pull a bait and switch because external forces sabotaged and hijacked the media and political channels of the project.
And now it's going to suffer the fate it deserves for the roadmap it has adopted.

This desu. BCH is the real bitcoin but they're slow to add exciting features and partnerships so the coin that matters right now is ETH.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Please stop.

The fact that you don't know anything doesn't mean people who point it out to you don't.

Been In btc since 12, I stop here every now and then to help out you noobz and pay my respects since I discovered btc here on Veeky Forums. It seems like no one on this board has any idea how open source software develops. Careful with the shit coins, everyone I know that works in the industry is at least 50% btc, even many of the ethereum founders.

Btc is IBM, eth is Xerox. I don't know who the Microsoft and Apple of cryptos will be.

You are probably the newest and most faggoty of the newfaggots. Stfu and learn about how open source software develops and maybe even pick up some math/cryptography/distributed systems knowledge so you aren't completely shitlost.

nah, but i do find it funny when late adopters seem to think that their shitcoin out of 1500 is somehow going to be the one to take over and dominate everything.

Everything that ETH does is what Bitcoin was designed to do. The Core developers and Blockstream blocked Vitalik from developing dApps on it, calling it "spam". What's why Bitcoin Cash is a thing. The intention is to make Bitcoin great again. Will it matter? idk, the damage might already be all done and ETH takes the crown.

BCH's problem is that they still haven't solved how to distribute development work and they're "understaffed" so to speak. But they are the only real censorship currency alternative to BTC (ETH has the occasional high fees and that's ok, the rest of them are hackable shitcoins).
ETH's problem is that while hard forks are perfectly OK, hard forks that redistribute money make it impossible to sell your project as money. Which is ok, ETH is a product, not money, and it's a product with a pretty cool value proposition, which attracted all the devs in the space.
Honestly everything else in this space are garbagecoins with the occasional single-issue token that will improve some niche industry. If the Microsoft and Apple are still to come, they haven't been announced yet.

Because bitcoin maximalists have no defense for btc except "muh legacy".

>blockstream
>chemtrails
you know that's how you sound right?

>blockstream isn't real

I'm not a maximalist but I am 66% btc and for good reason. I've used lightning on mainnet and it's unreal. Eth 2nd layer should be pretty good too and I like eos if they actually do what they say they are going to do.

It's funny to think that early adopters think that the oldest, most outdated technology is going to remain relevant forever.

>video rental stores are never going to go away!

>blockstream doesn't exist, only a conspiracy

That's not how open source software works. You have no idea what you are talking about. You are using tcp/ip moron and there were other "better" implementations at the time as well.

I've been coding for over twenty years, and using linux since 0.99f. I know exactly how genuine open source software works, and it isn't what's happening in core. What's happening in core is pretentious fuckwits like yourself are being conned into giving up the freedoms the original project was designed to bestow upon its users, and you're covering up your confusion with fake intellectual vanity, because you can't accept the simple fact that actually you have no fucking clue what's going on.
kill yourself.

So make something better than core faggot. You have no idea what the fuck you are talking about. Make something better and take over the world, no one cares who the fuck is making it. MAKE SOMETHING BETTER FAGGOT.

In theory but not in practice. Btc is fucking frozen in time, just like you grandpa.

Btc dominance fell from >85% to

There's dozens of much better coins than btc out right now.

Already done shit for brains, that's exactly what BCH is, what Bitcoin was to begin with, peer to peer electronic cash you lobotomised thundercunt. All they did was stick to the original design and roadmap.

I have alts.
I already have more money than I know what to do with.
Obviously btc dominance is going to go down when you can press a button on a screen and create faggot coin.
Yes the dominance will continue to go down because there are going to be literslly billions of chains.
You obviously haven't used LN yet or you would be weighted slightly heavy towards btc as well.

There was a fork back in August, you most of missed the memo.

I did the math on some thread a while ago. For McDonald's alone to switch entirely to bitcoin then it would take the entire world's annual energy usage (all forms) in electricity every 2 weeks to process their transactions.
So even if you had a crypto that was a million times more efficient your crypto future is a fucking delusion.

I hold an equal amount of bch to btc so I really don't care. BCH will end up using LN anyway and I was for 2X if it wasn't done by retards, but it was done by retards so we were all against it.

I have the same amount of bch as btc so I really don't care who wins.

BCH will probably not use LN, because the present iteration of LN relies on segwit, and segwit is complete fucking trash. It will however almost certainly eventually have second layer transaction processing, yes. I was also for 2X, but now that I've fully internalised and understood just how fucked up Segwit is I'm glad the chain wars are coming down to BCH vs BTC, and I hope BTC goes to its natural worth of zero after the treatment Blockstream and the core devs have subjected it to.

This. People who got into crypto In 2017 are a cancer.

Bitcoin is the only valuable crypto.

>most of
>must of
>of

Kys faggot.

>t. full retard

Payment channels already exist on both chains. Cross channeled LN doesn't fucking work and if it does it'll be implemented, doesn't require Segwit and in fact Segwit is reason enough to not want BTC. Also payment channels are mostly worthless anyway if settling on chain is too expensive/lead time prohibitive.

Shit, I guess fuck everything then.

BCH will definitely use a 2nd layer solution in the future NOT because they wouldn't raise the block limit enough to handle all the transactions in the world.
They'll need a 2nd layer similar to today's banking layer because people are retards who are too dumb to take good care of their own money and normies are going to lose wallets left and right. They'll also want some mistaken transactions reversed.

Really? Were you taking the LN into account with in those calculations of yours?

Malle fix without segwit is fine with me I really don't give a fuck but from the discussions I've had they understand some sort of 2nd layer is needed. Problem is that the bch community has hard dicks for on chain scaling. Like I said, ultimately I don't care who wins.

Basically this. Meanwhile everyone is able to retain their economic freedom and not forced onto a 2nd layer.

Even with LN why would I use btc instead of qtum, EOS or IoT Chain?

Atm, but the flippening is inevitable. Adapt when the time is due, or get shrekked

Are you schiz? I have no idea what kind of word salad nonsense you just put together?!

What don't you understand? This isn't even high level stuff.

The only argument against on-chain scaling is the cost to run a full node. Let's see who is going to run a full BTC node:
>All of blockstream
>Universities
>All 0 merchants who accept BTC
>Blockstream's 1000 fake nodes put on different VPS-es to simulate adoption
And BCH nodes:
>No-one from blockstream
>Universities
>All the thousands of merchant's who'd eventually use BCH
>Jihan's puppets who put 1000 fake nodes on AliCloud only in order to simulate adoption

BCH is actually going to be more decentralized by design, and had this been BTC the merchants would have already been there, too. There's literally no argument against on-chain scaling.

>the flippening is inevitable
Take your head out of your ass, most people still think crypto IS bitcoin. If BTC fails, everything crypto related will die with it for decades at least, because noone will touch it because >muh ponzi.

Because LN opens the door for insane scalability and use cases where you won't even know you are using bitcoin. Sub satoshi fees, instant, global, no scaling wall, millions of tx per second. I already know people working on a global venmo that uses unique user ID like email, like [email protected]

This pierre guy is a delusional fucktard lmao.

Good, fuck it. Let it burn. I'm in this shit for the long term. It just gives me more time to accumulate.

Fine. Like I said I don't care who wins. My only point is that layer 2 is amazing. For anyone here that hasn't used it yet, I recommend trying It out. Bch should have a good second layer, eth too and I like eos.

Honest question, what is so amazing about layer 2 that the main blockchain doesn't have?

I'm not so sure second layer makes sense for transaction reversibility, the whole five dollar wrench problem etc is ripe territory for innovation at the end of the day, in the mainstream market it is solved by reversible transactions, but maybe there's a better way. To my mind, the big use case for second layer is transaction types that don't make economic sense to be pushed on chain, if the chain capacity isn't artificially restricted, it is still going to have a natural limit, and once that limit is reached, it's extremely unlikely that will also happen to coincide with the exact amount of total transactions people would ideally like to be able to make across the entire world, and with this natural market force for the transaction setting the fee to a very small level, it makes perfect sense then to have other layers.
The only thing that makes me despise lightning, Blockstream, and Bitcoin's approach to second layer scaling is because they're transparently sabotaging an open source project that had the potential to change the world perhaps more than any other software before it, just so they can pad the fucking Blockstream bottom line, it's just so fucking disgusting what they've done, I hope the industry never forgets and they all get what they deserve.

I like how no corecuck tried to refute this. I don't care whether BTC lives or dies, I'm hedged either way, and so should everyone be.

So? That's still inferior to a lot of much better cryptos? Why waste with an old dilapidated shitcoin with a bad foundation and an upgrade shell placed on top just because it has a recognizable name? Especially when there are dozens of better coins built more solid from the ground up...

Instant.
Sub satoshi fees.
The tx fee to join the network is already proving to be refunded by many nodes.
Unlimited scaling.
Insane new use cases not possible before.

It's not hard. Try it out.

>blockchain is great
>lets not use it

Making it so all end users besides node operators (it will literally be banks) can settle on the blockchain, makes using crypto utterly pointless.

You shortsightedness is hilarious. Btc will die out the upcoming years. People will start to get used to other cryptos. Just like they learned to adapt to other superior products in the past.

BTC maximalists have always been cringeworthy retards who never grasped the underlying ideas behind crypto. They're the circa 2013 version of the retards flooding in now who think regurgitating Corecuck propaganda means they are smart.

What you don't seem to understand is that people TRUST bitcoin, and that's immensely valuable.

All the fucking fakeshills on twatter are dead ass disabled or some fuck

The foundation is fine. The only reason that other chains haven't hit a scaling wall is because they HAVEN'T hit the scaling wall. Layer 2 is needed with every chain in existence right now.

It's an impartial arbiter for the first time in human history. There is no need for my purchase of a coffee to go to the arbiter when there is no dispute. I can make 1,000,000,000 tx a year and settle up at the end of the year or decade just fine.

>ETH's problem is that while hard forks are perfectly OK, hard forks that redistribute money make it impossible to sell your project as money.

Because 'they switched to a fork which reversed theft of 5% of all ethers and therefore they are useless as money' sounds so convincing.

People with your logic are btc hodlers who don't spend their coins at all, so their opinion is irrelevant.

If by any random astral event one of the alt devs find an innovative addon to the blockchain it can also be implemented in bitcoin. There is literally nothing an alt can do (not gimmicks or vapor, just sustainable scalable tech) that bitcoin cannot do as we speak.

Comparing wallstreet-bitcoin to bitcoin-alts is the most retarded leddit comparison I've ever seen.

Sorry, I really don't want to be trolling but I can't see any of these being something that 0-conf doesn't provide already.

You guys are hopeless. Gonna go get my cock sucked by 2 seeking arrangement girls now. Gl with the shit coins but I recommend holding at least 33% btc and equal amount bch. Coin to coin, not percentage.

I sense Bcash cult supporter.

How big does block has to be for 1,000,000,000,000 0conf txs every 10min?

There's a precedent of redistribution. It means that if the majority of users want to switch to a fork which taxes the rich and gives to the poor, there's this risk that the old chain that doesn't will die. Probably sounds silly now but you do need to look into the future when less than 1% of users will be libertarians.
Once code stops being law and there's a fair dictator on top it's simply not uncensorable money, and it doesn't cover BTC's value proposition. It's perfectly good at what it does and I hold a shit ton of it, but it's not money.

let's use it but only as a security measure for other layers so as to avoid bloating it with useless data like dapps and dust transactions (useless for the purpose a blockchain provides - open secure ledger)

>Pierre Rochard
>Jean Cripteau

>Every person on the planet will be making 143 transactions every 10 minutes, including while he's sleeping, therefore we should limit block space to 1mb

>I can make 1,000,000,000 tx a year and settle up at the end of the year or decade just fine.

Okay so why use blockchain again? Nodes are centralized with their own ledgers subject to all kinds of fuckery before settlement.

If you want to use a payment processor just use fucking Visa. Speaking of which, this will be subject to KYC and other kinds of regulation that isn't able to control blockchain transactions.

Wow, that's actually an interesting point. I'd argue tho that most people who control the forking would themselves be economically active, i.e. they would not benefit from this redistribution. I see a bigger problem if there's a centralized agency that can control this because then it will simply HAPPEN, because the gov says so. At least you can contest it with ETH

Iot would require the streaming of resources and yes that number of tx is very possible, do your homework. So let me rephrase since you are a being a cunt, what about 1,000,000 tx every 10 min?

lol at all these salty threads. BTC is #1 for a reason, crying on a chinese rice art forum will change fuck all. Enjoy your bags

LN is going to kill bitcoin because it only scales well if it's used in with bitcoin banks/exchanges. Like that recent lightning ramp that uses internal coinbase transfers. Nobody is actually going to keep their bitcoins in a channel. It requires a full node for a start + being online 24/7 to watch for fraud.

Everyone forgot that nobody needs crypto transfers for legit payments. It's inferior in every possible way.
Pay with credit card and possibly get some bonus back vs
send money to an exchange, buy bitcoin (fees + spread = ~0.5%), send to someone while paying a fee to the payment gateway (~1%).
The only people who are going to use crypto to pay for legit things are those that use it as a method to cash out, but that's obviously not sustainable.

LN is useless for illegal transfers because every company has one address which destroys pseudonymity.

That's not accurate. The balance between parties cannot be fucked with, that's literally the whole point moron.

Jesus fuck, btc wasn't this fucking miracle project. Sure it was an innovation but a lot of innovation since then has happened in the almost 10 years from it's launch.

Deluded

>There's a precedent of redistribution.

Precedent doesn't mean anything. Every decentralized crypto can be forked. If there's strong enough economic pressure to do so it's going to happen. Then it's only a question what's the split.

I don't think such a fork is realistic today, unless there's some catastrophic bug found in ethereum itself that results in enormous theft, I mean something like 10% of all ethers.

>Once code stops being law

Code is only law on the unforked chain. It's impossible to force people to remain on it.

as long as there are people who value Sats over USD the market will peg all coins at a specific value to btc for better or worse. A flippening cannot happen as long as minimalists exist. They will sooner kill the market than allow another coin to go above BTCs USD value.